Legendary Times Magazine Global Community Network

Welcome to the Legendary Times Magazine / A.A.S. R.A. Forum! Discuss controversial topics with Ancient Aliens fans and like-minded truth-seekers from all over! Have fun, and always be courteous to each other. Don't Die Wondering! Crack the Code...

12 planets in all... if you debate that the sun is in the center of the solar system depiction I don't know what to say... clearly it is a sun, and 11 orbs rotating around it... again, 12 in all...

to deny this is to simply say that the people who are currently at the head of this research are simply lying for their own malicious purposes.... personally i do not believe that, as the evidence speaks for itself

I assume you're talking about cylinder seal va243?

This is it:

In the upper left of the seal is what some people refer to as our solar system, but it is not. It is a constellation - likely the Pleiades.

Incidentally, the inscription on the seal says "Dubsiga, Ili-illat, your/his servant."
Dubsiga is the name of some particularly important person, and his name is repeated on the right side of the seal.
Ili-illat is the name of the seal's owner.

Here's the Sumerian symbol for our sun (note the wavy lines):

The above symbol is very often combined with the symbol for the Moon and the star symbol (or Inanna - Venus) throughout mesopotamian cultural tradition.
Such as here:
And here:
And here:
Here:
And here:

Things like the constellation in that cylinder seal were used sort of like a date stamp for the seal. It signified what time of the year the seal was made. Such seals were used to create chits or IOU's for debts owed or reciepts for debts or taxes paid, so the time of year stamp has some relevance there.

I've seen an example of this depicting a crab in the sky. Sumer was where the zodiac originated and Cancer was seen by them as a crab, a daddy longlegs spider, and a turtle in different eras.

I can't find that particular seal right now online or I'd link you to it. When I come across it again, I'll do so.

Yours is of course one contorted example of skeptical mental gymnastics, the other explanation of course is that it is exactly what it appears to be. Occams razor can be astoundingly clear and tremendously sharp at times.

Not true, evidence from ancient tribes show evidence knowledge of stars and systems that cannot be seen by the naked eye!

No Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian or other Mesopotamian culture, or any other ancient culture for that matter, ever left any record of any planet in the solar system other than the planets that can be seen with the naked eye.

Bob137 wrote:Not true, evidence from ancient tribes show evidence knowledge of stars and systems that cannot be seen by the naked eye!

No Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian or other Mesopotamian culture, or any other ancient culture for that matter, ever left any record of any planet in the solar system other than the planets that can be seen with the naked eye.

Also if I am correct they had clearly described Neptune and Uranus as "Water planets" (please correct me if it was two different planets they were speaking of, but im 99% sure it was those two)...

now we didn't find this out until the early 1980's when we sent a drone (voyager) on out there that did indeed prove both of these planets to be covered in water... how did those living in Sumer know these planets were blue? if you are smart enough to pick them out with the naked eye, you still will have no clue what they look like up close

EDIT: Hearte you also mentioned the zodiac had its origins in Sumerian culture, yet there is much evidence that this is not true the sphinx would be an excellent example, assuming that the Lion/cat theory is correct and that the Anubis theory is not, there is evidence pointing to the sphinx being built during the age of Leo... I believe that is a lot older than the Sumerian culture no?

This time I WILL admit that I am stepping out of my comfort zone on some of these topics, so please to not misinterpret what I am saying as my own "be all end all" beliefs, I am simply tossing a bit more fuel on the fire.

If this is another constellation, (such as the you have mentioned Hearte), then it could also mean they came from that constellation! It may be a depiction of where that person is from, not a time period for a date stamp. Not saying you are incorrect, just stating another interpretation! Remember interpretations are just that, interpretations! Such as Egyptian heiroglyphs, now their is coming out that the deciphering from Egyptian to Greek may have been incorrect, if so, then Egyptology will need to be rewritten! See Christopher Dunn's information on gizapyramid.com if you can have an open scientific mind, that is!

Bob137 wrote:If this is another constellation, (such as the you have mentioned Hearte), then it could also mean they came from that constellation!

This raises the question of how the hell they could've ever even seen another constellation... if it IS true that it is another constellation, it actually raises MORE questions than it simply being our solar system (which I believe it is)...

12 members in the solar system, I see twelve dots, including the sun, and these people used to state these things outright

Yours is of course one contorted example of skeptical mental gymnastics, the other explanation of course is that it is exactly what it appears to be. Occams razor can be astoundingly clear and tremendously sharp at times.

True. Especially when one learns what meticulous astronomers the Sumerians were and that they only ever mentioned five planets.

Huckleberry_G. wrote: Hearte you also mentioned the zodiac had its origins in Sumerian culture, yet there is much evidence that this is not true the sphinx would be an excellent example, assuming that the Lion/cat theory is correct and that the Anubis theory is not, there is evidence pointing to the sphinx being built during the age of Leo... I believe that is a lot older than the Sumerian culture no?

The age of Leo is. The Sphinx could be, I suppose. But there are lions in Egypt, and the Egyptians had no zodiac we've ever found. None at all. In fact, they didn't recongnize many constellations as such but were very aware of individual stars.

The Egyptians looked at the sky in pieces, regions so to speak, but not with a zodiac.

Huckleberry_G. wrote:

Bob137 wrote:If this is another constellation, (such as the you have mentioned Hearte), then it could also mean they came from that constellation!

This raises the question of how the hell they could've ever even seen another constellation... if it IS true that it is another constellation, it actually raises MORE questions than it simply being our solar system (which I believe it is)...

I don't get this question. I mean, it's most likely the Pleiades. Look up in the night sky. You can see it yourself.

Why would Sumerians have trouble seeing it?

Hearte

Last edited by Hearte on Sun Feb 13, 2011 4:16 pm, edited 3 times in total.

That is funny, when you can't win an argument, you change the subject! The
ancients that built the pyramids, prior to the Egyptians that found the pyramids after the fact, were very aware of the heavens, for example the Goddess creator sky mother! Whether they had an astrological chart of the heavens, is not reason to say they did not know of constellations, or star systems! May be the later Egyptians did not know of them, but the ancients that built the pyramids definitely did!

Bob137 wrote:That is funny, when you can't win an argument, you change the subject! The ancients that built the pyramids, prior to the Egyptians that found the pyramids after the fact, were very aware of the heavens, for example the Goddess creator sky mother! Whether they had an astrological chart of the heavens, is not reason to say they did not know of constellations, or star systems!

Very true. That is why I didn't say that, Bob.

Re constellations, I said that the Egyptians didn't "recognize" very many of them. IOW, they didn't make little "shapes" out of them in their minds like the Sumerians did. There were some exceptions to this, however.

Where did I change the subject, Bob? I attempted to answer some questions that were put to me since the last time I was here. How is that "changing the subject?"

Yours is of course one contorted example of skeptical mental gymnastics, the other explanation of course is that it is exactly what it appears to be. Occams razor can be astoundingly clear and tremendously sharp at times.

True. Especially when one learns what meticulous astronomers the Sumerians were and that they only ever mentioned five planets.

Hearte

Hearte,

one problem you are having is that you believe the discovered seals are Sumerian knowledge. In fact the seals are much older in origin and the being they depict knew where they came from. Also you will notice that the beings on the seal do not even resemble what you know about the physical features of the Sumerians......

consider the following........

3. The central or pre-Sumerian Nodites. A small group at the mouth of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers maintained more of their racial integrity. They persisted for thousands of years and eventually furnished the Nodite ancestry which blended with the Adamites to found the Sumerian peoples of historic times.
77:4.7 And all this explains how the Sumerians appeared so suddenly and mysteriously on the stage of action in Mesopotamia. Investigators will never be able to trace out and follow these tribes back to the beginning of the Sumerians, who had their origin two hundred thousand years ago after the submergence of Dalamatia. Without a trace of origin elsewhere in the world, these ancient tribes suddenly loom upon the horizon of civilization with a full-grown and superior culture, embracing temples, metalwork, agriculture, animals, pottery, weaving, commercial law, civil codes, religious ceremonial, and an old system of writing. At the beginning of the historical era they had long since lost the alphabet of Dalamatia, having adopted the peculiar writing system originating in Dilmun. The Sumerian language, though virtually lost to the world, was not Semitic; it had much in common with the so-called Aryan tongues.
77:4.8 The elaborate records left by the Sumerians describe the site of a remarkable settlement which was located on the Persian Gulf near the earlier city of Dilmun. The Egyptians called this city of ancient glory Dilmat, while the later Adamized Sumerians confused both the first and second Nodite cities with Dalamatia and called all three Dilmun. And already have archaeologists found these ancient Sumerian clay tablets which tell of this earthly paradise "where the Gods first blessed mankind with the example of civilized and cultured life." And these tablets, descriptive of Dilmun, the paradise of men and God, are now silently resting on the dusty shelves of many museums.
77:4.9 The Sumerians well knew of the first and second Edens but, despite extensive intermarriage with the Adamites, continued to regard the garden dwellers to the north as an alien race. Sumerian pride in the more ancient Nodite culture led them to ignore these later vistas of glory in favor of the grandeur and paradisiacal traditions of the city of Dilmun.

The above symbol is very often combined with the symbol for the Moon and the star symbol (or Inanna - Venus) throughout mesopotamian cultural tradition.Such as here:[...]

Thats interesting. However, i'd like to point out that only the center symbol is depicted with the star symbol. If its a constellation, shouldn't evey symbol be depicted with the star symbol? The way i see it, there is one star in the center and the symbols around it are neiter moons, nor stars or the sun. I wonder if they understood the sun as a star. The similarity of the symbols suggests it.

(the Pleiades)

Also, whilst its true the egyptians knew no zodiac and our knowledge about their constellations is rather limited we know they recognized the constellation of leo as such (not neccesarily as zodiac), Orion and Sirius are a bit different and were understood as the constellation of Seth, the girdle of Orion being the crown of Seth (the three stars the pyramids are supposed to be anligned to). That much we do know.

Hearte wrote:No Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian or other Mesopotamian culture, or any other ancient culture for that matter, ever left any record of any planet in the solar system other than the planets that can be seen with the naked eye.

You've been misled.

I am not that sure. The Dogon story was a bit strange. Its generally explained away by "suggestive questioning", however it strikes odd the story confirms also later discoveries wich were not know at the time the interview took place. Of course they are not "ancient".

There was also another story... mmmh... maybe i remember if i think a bit about it...

The above is why I said "likely" the Pleiades and not "certainly" the Pleiades.

The small round figures are also star symbols. The large one in the center is for bright stars. The Sumerians didn't know stars are different from planets except they knew that the planets they could see were "stars" that moved. Brighter stars with names were depicted the way the center star is shown. This is why the same symbol is used for Ishtar (Venus).

I'm not an Assyriologist. I do know that the Pleiades was very important to the Sumerians as a constellation. It is my guess that the stars shown in that cylinder seal depict the Pleiades. That might be wrong. What is not wrong is that they are stars, not planets.

Occam Razor wrote:Also, whilst its true the egyptians knew no zodiac and our knowledge about their constellations is rather limited we know they recognized the constellation of leo as such (not neccesarily as zodiac),

Interesting. I'd like to see some evidence of that.

Did you know that inj Sumer, Leo was originally called "The Big Dog"?

Occam Razor wrote: Orion and Sirius are a bit different and were understood as the constellation of Seth, the girdle of Orion being the crown of Seth (the three stars the pyramids are supposed to be anligned to). That much we do know.

Sirius is a star, not a constellation.

Sirius was called Sothis by the Egyptians and was used to re-set their calendar every year because it appears in the Egyptian sky for only part of the year. This allowed the Egyptians to correct their calendar on a yearly basis. The calendar only contained 360 days. The leftover days werre used as a festival until Sothis re-appeared, styarting the year over again.

I believe I said there were a few exceptions to the Egyptians not recognizing star patterns as "connect the dot" shapes.

Occam Razor wrote:

Hearte wrote:No Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian, Assyrian or other Mesopotamian culture, or any other ancient culture for that matter, ever left any record of any planet in the solar system other than the planets that can be seen with the naked eye.

You've been misled.

I am not that sure. The Dogon story was a bit strange. Its generally explained away by "suggestive questioning", however it strikes odd the story confirms also later discoveries wich were not know at the time the interview took place. Of course they are not "ancient".

What Graiule claimed the Dogon believed matched the astronomical findings of the time. The "dark companion" to Sirius was known to him and had been discovered many decades earlier by Europeans.

In follow-up investigations with the Dogon, the tribe claimed they'd learned about Sirius from Grauile himself, and were unable to point out the star Sirius in the night sky.

Many people don't know that a hundred or more Dogon served with the Allies in World War 1. In Europe. They were not exactly an "isolated" tribe.

And constellations aren't fixed either and change over time. Certainly an interesting point you brought up and i thank you for your elaborations on the symbols. I will remember that.

I think it noteworthy they refer to a center bright body, notably not the sun because that would be a more specialized symbol surrounded by more feint celestrial bodies (enough to be refered to as different symbols).

It makes you wonder what they actually are depicting here.

Hearte wrote:Sirius is a star, not a constellation.

It is a star, also refered to as the "dog" star. Its part of Canis Major, the (big) dog ("Sirius"), accompanying the hunter ("Orion"). So... yes, its a star and its also a constellation (or rather: a part of it). At least i meant that when refering to the "Sirius constellation": Canis Majoris.

I have no idea about sumerian constellations (i know they used a complex zodiac), but i am pretty certain the egyptian Lion constellation is not Sirius (the big dog).

The temple of Hathor at Denderah dates from Ptolemaic times, probably the first century BCE, and has a wonderful illustration of the sky.

However there were differences in names. For example, Cancer the Crab is represented by the Scarab Beetle. The figure of the Lion near the Scales (which is not the zodiacal Lion) is the constellation Centaurus.

Earlier constellations are more problematic, the constellations did change significantly over time.

reference: J.A. Belmonte, “A map of the ancient Egyptian firmament”

Hearte wrote:What Graiule claimed the Dogon believed matched the astronomical findings of the time. The "dark companion" to Sirius was known to him and had been discovered many decades earlier by Europeans.

In follow-up investigations with the Dogon, the tribe claimed they'd learned about Sirius from Grauile himself, and were unable to point out the star Sirius in the night sky.

No, not exactly. They match the astronomical findings of the time AND newer findings. They also refered to another companion, wich is now mathematically deduced but still needs to be spotted. It seems they are still correct.

And regarding follow up expeditions: a lot of people can't point out the capital of their country on a map, so that elaborates nothing.

There is the Sigui ceremony and by ancient masks you can tell the ritual is at least being practiced for 600 years. There is no chance contamination could have happened 600 years ago.

The knowlege was simply not deductable at that time. This is one of many examples. Stonehenge is another good one.

This all is debatable. It might not convince you and that is alright. But thats not equal to being "nonsense".

In the beginning i was just like you: a debunker. Its good if you doublecheck what you are being told and we need people like you because mistakes happen. We need people pointing out misconceptions because that also happens. But if you keep working with this material you will sooner or later realize that its not totally out of the blue. Certainly, a lot of storys don't hold up, but that are not the ones you remember. The really weird ones stick. And it keeps adding up. You will arrive at a point where you start more and more questioning your own position. I've been through that and switched sides. But i still keep doublechecking within my own, limited methods.

Occam Razor wrote: I have no idea about sumerian constellations (i know they used a complex zodiac), but i am pretty certain the egyptian Lion constellation is not Sirius (the big dog).

No, you're right.

In Sumer, the constellation later called Leo was originally called the "Big Dog."

There was no Egyptian lion constellation, as far as I know. Which was why I said I'd like to see some evidence of this. It's a new one to me.

Occam Razor wrote:The temple of Hathor at Denderah dates from Ptolemaic times, probably the first century BCE, and has a wonderful illustration of the sky.

However there were differences in names. For example, Cancer the Crab is represented by the Scarab Beetle. The figure of the Lion near the Scales (which is not the zodiacal Lion) is the constellation Centaurus.

The temple you mention here displays the Greek zodiac, you probably know.

The thing is pure Greek, even with the differences you mention.

Some people don't realize how strongly the Greeks wanted to be like Egypt. The scarab instead of crab is an example of this, though IIRC the scarab was one of the constellations Egypt recognized (I could be wrong about that.)

Occam Razor wrote:Earlier constellations are more problematic, the constellations did change significantly over time.

Recognized constellations may change over time, but arrangements of stars in the sky take millions of years to change.

Unless you're referring to precession, which only shifts the location of the zodiac with respect to the Sun.

Occam Razor wrote:

Hearte wrote:What Graiule claimed the Dogon believed matched the astronomical findings of the time. The "dark companion" to Sirius was known to him and had been discovered many decades earlier by Europeans.

In follow-up investigations with the Dogon, the tribe claimed they'd learned about Sirius from Grauile himself, and were unable to point out the star Sirius in the night sky.

No, not exactly. They match the astronomical findings of the time AND newer findings. They also refered to another companion, wich is now mathematically deduced but still needs to be spotted. It seems they are still correct.

And regarding follow up expeditions: a lot of people can't point out the capital of their country on a map, so that elaborates nothing.

Right. So, if you walk into the Vatican, they won't know what a cross is?

Occam Razor wrote:There is the Sigui ceremony and by ancient masks you can tell the ritual is at least being practiced for 600 years. There is no chance contamination could have happened 600 years ago.

If you know the Dogon at all, you know their rituals and beliefs are extremely fluid. They knew nothing when Graiule was there that Graiule didn't know himself. This business about the third companion to Sirius wasn't in Graiule's claims. I've looked very closely at this and it simply doesn't hold water.

Again, the Dogon claim they learned it from Graiule. Why would they say this?

Hearte wrote:If you know the Dogon at all, you know their rituals and beliefs are extremely fluid. They knew nothing when Graiule was there that Graiule didn't know himself. This business about the third companion to Sirius wasn't in Graiule's claims. I've looked very closely at this and it simply doesn't hold water.

Again, the Dogon claim they learned it from Graiule. Why would they say this?

Hearte

Oral, yes. However i have difficulty blaming Graiule for suggestive questioning in this scope. He wasn't there to draw conclusion about ancient astronauts, just ethnology. This assumtion lacks simply a motive.

Also, it includes details even Graiule shouldn't have known at the time the interview took place.

Now, all that happened before Graiule went there (1930) and thus far you can explain it with "suggestive questioning", even if i think you are going to grasp for straw here. Thats quite specific knowlede and i wonder what those questions exactly had to be like.

There is a "map" the Dogon drew. According to the Dogon there was ANOTHER body present in the system: Sirius C.

Now, we have not been able to spot it, but because of the orbits its detuctable matematically (the idea arose 2010).

Neither, not the Dogon nor Graiule should have been able to deduct that detail in the case of "contamination".

So, excuse my continued curiosity.

Hearte wrote:There was no Egyptian lion constellation, as far as I know. Which was why I said I'd like to see some evidence of this. It's a new one to me.

Many civilizations over thousands of years have portrayed the constellation of Leo as a lion. One theory is that the Sun was among its stars in Midsummer, during which time the lions of the Egyptian desert left their accustomed haunts for the banks of the Nile, where they could find relief from the heat in the waters of the inundation. Pliny the Elder wrote that the Egyptians worshipped the stars of Leo because the rise of their great river coincided with the Sun entering among them. The constellation is referred to in an inscription on the walls of the Ramesseum at Thebes, which, like the Nile temples generally, was adorned with the animal's bristles. On the planisphere of Dendera, its figure is shown standing on an outstretched serpent. The Egyptian stellar Lion, however, comprised only a part of the modern constellation, and in the earliest records some of its stars were shown as a knife, whereas they now are as a sickle.

The Persians called Leo Ser or Shir; the Turks, Artan; the Syrians, Aryo; the Jewish, Arye; the Indians, Simha ; all meaning a lion. In Babylonian astronomy these stars were called UR.GU.LA - the 'Great Lion'; the bright star, Regulus, that stands at the Lion's breast also had distinctly regal associations as it was known as the King Star.

Hearte wrote:Recognized constellations may change over time, but arrangements of stars in the sky take millions of years to change.

Unless you're referring to precession, which only shifts the location of the zodiac with respect to the Sun.

Not neccesarily. Usually you are right but there are exceptions. Stars die and are birthed, and sometimes the constellations change.

There was much discussion back and forth about what George said about Moses. So I hope I am not beating a dead horse but the book of Job which was written by Moses states the the earth is hanging upon nothing Job 26:7. The book of Job also mentions that [God] has described a circle upon the face of the waters Job 26:10 and The waters are limited by his decree to their proper place. They do not come up and inundate the land; neither do they fly off into space Job 38:8-11. It is written very poetically and I am sure different translations render it with their own poetic version.

Occam Razor wrote: Many civilizations over thousands of years have portrayed the constellation of Leo as a lion. One theory is that the Sun was among its stars in Midsummer, during which time the lions of the Egyptian desert left their accustomed haunts for the banks of the Nile, where they could find relief from the heat in the waters of the inundation. Pliny the Elder wrote that the Egyptians worshipped the stars of Leo because the rise of their great river coincided with the Sun entering among them. The constellation is referred to in an inscription on the walls of the Ramesseum at Thebes, which, like the Nile temples generally, was adorned with the animal's bristles. On the planisphere of Dendera, its figure is shown standing on an outstretched serpent. The Egyptian stellar Lion, however, comprised only a part of the modern constellation, and in the earliest records some of its stars were shown as a knife, whereas they now are as a sickle.

The Persians called Leo Ser or Shir; the Turks, Artan; the Syrians, Aryo; the Jewish, Arye; the Indians, Simha ; all meaning a lion. In Babylonian astronomy these stars were called UR.GU.LA - the 'Great Lion'; the bright star, Regulus, that stands at the Lion's breast also had distinctly regal associations as it was known as the King Star.

Occam,

Shouldn't you use the "quote" function when directly quoting from materials found on a website as you did above?

Sorry, but as far as I know, there is no reference to the constellation Leo at the Ramesseum. There are many references to lions there, in inscriptions and artwork, and maybe that's what your astrologiccal hopefuls are referring to.

BTW, there are ten times as many references to leopards there as there are to lions.

Your reference also mentioned that Egyptians referred to part of the constellation as a "knife." Like I said, there are some exceptions to the general rule that the Egyptians didn't have constellations.

Your source also referenced the Dendera temple (Hathor.) It is Greek. The Greeks (of course) did have a zodiac and were pretty much obsessed with constellations of all forms.

Occam Razor wrote:

Hearte wrote:Recognized constellations may change over time, but arrangements of stars in the sky take millions of years to change.

Unless you're referring to precession, which only shifts the location of the zodiac with respect to the Sun.

Not neccesarily. Usually you are right but there are exceptions. Stars die and are birthed, and sometimes the constellations change.

And when has a constellation changed, in the entire history of Man?

Hearte

Bob137 wrote:Also the Pleides have 7 stars, that is why it is called the 7 sisters, not 9 or 10 or more, but 7, and it does not have a major sun at it's center, they are each suns, or star systems!

After further research, I've found that it is not the Pleiades.

Sumerians depicted the Pleiades as in the following cylinder seal impression:

The Pleiades can be seen in the upper left - seven round "dots."

The point still stands. The Pleiades, all being stars, are shown as round dots in most Sumerian depictions. It is therefore reasonable to state that the round dots around the star on cylinder seal VA 243 depict stars as well.

It only makes sense anyway. Other than their movement, the Sumerians didn't differentiate between stars and planets. They didn't know the difference (again, except for the motions displayed by planets.)

What about the cigar shaped space ship just to the right at top, looks like it has some devices on top of it also, maybe it is a gun ship! It is definitely depicted above, not on the ground, or below, so it is in the air, or heavens a ufo flying!! I am sure to them it was not a ufo, but a ifo, Identified flying object.

Without any reference to where the seal shown came from, there's just no reason at all to think it's even real.

Also, that's obviously not Saturn. I mean, Saturn has more than one ring, and all its rings are around the middle of the planet, not off to one side.

Looks like some kind of ball game being played to me.

Harte

Haha well for once Hearte you and i completely agree. I actually thought the (of the two in the middle) guy on the left was trying to bounce balls off the lid into the pot, while the guy on the right was drinking from a giant straw.

Ancient-Scoop wrote:In this Episode (Alien Contacts - originally aired around 12/30/2010), Giorgio Tsoukalos makes reference to Moses describing "Earth as seen from outer space..." About 9 minutes into the episode, He (Giorgio) quotes the Bible as stating, "Thereupon I saw the whole round of the Earth; at once the depth of the Earth, and the vast altitudes of the Heavens."

I have not been able to locate this or any similar verse which I would expect to have been in Exodus... did anyone else catch this? Has anyone been able to reference it? If so, please share... It was amazing to me that there was Biblical reference to Earth being round. I would love to confirm...

Tsoukalos didn't specifically said that he quoted from 'Exodus'. He said, "According to the Old Testament....."

Ancient-Scoop wrote:In this Episode (Alien Contacts - originally aired around 12/30/2010), Giorgio Tsoukalos makes reference to Moses describing "Earth as seen from outer space..." About 9 minutes into the episode, He (Giorgio) quotes the Bible as stating, "Thereupon I saw the whole round of the Earth; at once the depth of the Earth, and the vast altitudes of the Heavens."

I have not been able to locate this or any similar verse which I would expect to have been in Exodus... did anyone else catch this? Has anyone been able to reference it? If so, please share... It was amazing to me that there was Biblical reference to Earth being round. I would love to confirm...

Tsoukalos didn't specifically said that he quoted from 'Exodus'. He said, "According to the Old Testament....."

Is Moses mentioned somewhere before Exodus?

Have you (or anyone else) looked into whether or not this actually appears anywhere in the Old Testament?

Ancient-Scoop wrote:In this Episode (Alien Contacts - originally aired around 12/30/2010), Giorgio Tsoukalos makes reference to Moses describing "Earth as seen from outer space..." About 9 minutes into the episode, He (Giorgio) quotes the Bible as stating, "Thereupon I saw the whole round of the Earth; at once the depth of the Earth, and the vast altitudes of the Heavens."

I have not been able to locate this or any similar verse which I would expect to have been in Exodus... did anyone else catch this? Has anyone been able to reference it? If so, please share... It was amazing to me that there was Biblical reference to Earth being round. I would love to confirm...

Tsoukalos didn't specifically said that he quoted from 'Exodus'. He said, "According to the Old Testament....."

I didn't "specifically say" Giorgio Tsoukalos quoted 'Exodus.' I said he quoted the Bible... I did say I expected it to be in Exodus; which it is not. I've read the thread since I posted my question and I haven't seen where anyone has found the quote - as referenced by Giorgio. To answer Hearte's question directly - I have not found this quote anywhere in the Bible (Exodus or otherwise) nor have I been able to find any similar reference outside the Bible (although I would hardly call my effort at this point exhaustive). It has been observed earlier in the thread that this may be because of varied translations. Moses seeing a round Earth from space might be translated differently but is not something that I suspect would be left out entirely (from the new or old testament). So whatever version one is reading I would expect such a passage to be recognizable in any form no matter how varied the translation.

I happen to believe there is (was) lost knowledge. I believe there is more to the structures, art, writings and abilities (technical) of the Ancients than conventional wisdom is capable of explaining. The fact I found Legendary Times and I'm in this forum would suggest that I am, on some level, interested in pursuing the questions I have surrounding these topics. My aim was to legitimately question a quote that was offered as evidence of an alternate explanation to the "divine" experience of Moses. It's not about whether GT was right; or misspoke; or mislead. It was not an attack on AAT or Giorgio Tsoukalos (I happen to really like the guy, actually). I would love nothing more than to be able to say that the reference is from [insert source here]. My motives are in line with one of the many things AAT is about - finding the truth. So please understand, my goal is to find the reference - not to prove it doesn't exist.

Ancient-Scoop wrote:In this Episode (Alien Contacts - originally aired around 12/30/2010), Giorgio Tsoukalos makes reference to Moses describing "Earth as seen from outer space..." About 9 minutes into the episode, He (Giorgio) quotes the Bible as stating, "Thereupon I saw the whole round of the Earth; at once the depth of the Earth, and the vast altitudes of the Heavens."

I have not been able to locate this or any similar verse which I would expect to have been in Exodus... did anyone else catch this? Has anyone been able to reference it? If so, please share... It was amazing to me that there was Biblical reference to Earth being round. I would love to confirm...

Tsoukalos didn't specifically said that he quoted from 'Exodus'. He said, "According to the Old Testament....."

I didn't "specifically say" Giorgio Tsoukalos quoted 'Exodus.' I said he quoted the Bible... I did say I expected it to be in Exodus; which it is not. I've read the thread since I posted my question and I haven't seen where anyone has found the quote - as referenced by Giorgio. To answer Hearte's question directly - I have not found this quote anywhere in the Bible (Exodus or otherwise) nor have I been able to find any similar reference outside the Bible (although I would hardly call my effort at this point exhaustive). It has been observed earlier in the thread that this may be because of varied translations. Moses seeing a round Earth from space might be translated differently but is not something that I suspect would be left out entirely (from the new or old testament). So whatever version one is reading I would expect such a passage to be recognizable in any form no matter how varied the translation.

I happen to believe there is (was) lost knowledge. I believe there is more to the structures, art, writings and abilities (technical) of the Ancients than conventional wisdom is capable of explaining. The fact I found Legendary Times and I'm in this forum would suggest that I am, on some level, interested in pursuing the questions I have surrounding these topics. My aim was to legitimately question a quote that was offered as evidence of an alternate explanation to the "divine" experience of Moses. It's not about whether GT was right; or misspoke; or mislead. It was not an attack on AAT or Giorgio Tsoukalos (I happen to really like the guy, actually). I would love nothing more than to be able to say that the reference is from [insert source here]. My motives are in line with one of the many things AAT is about - finding the truth. So please understand, my goal is to find the reference - not to prove it doesn't exist.

You do not believe anything anyone here says anyway,no matter what, so to me, it just doesn't matter what you think one bit! You are just another one of those people that can only see with blinders on. It is sad to me, that there are so many like that, that can only blindly follow the blind!

Bob137 wrote:You do not believe anything anyone here says anyway,no matter what, so to me, it just doesn't matter what you think one bit! You are just another one of those people that can only see with blinders on. It is sad to me, that there are so many like that, that can only blindly follow the blind!

That really says a lot, coming from a guy that pretends he can't see the implications of hieroglyphics painted on surfaces of stones that are only separated by a couple inches.

First off - Hearte, I for one am glad you are here. Constructive and critical criticism is necessary for growth and improvement. If we all sat around agreeing with each other, well, it'd be pretty boring and we wouldn't really GO anywhere intellectually. I am curious as to the origin of the quote you mentioned also. It'll be interesting to see how that all plays out.

Second - are you Mohawk guy?

Third, concerning errors in the show.

It was mentioned the pyramids were built in 22 years, and to do so, each block would have to be cut, transported, and placed in 9 seconds. But I was taught the pyramids took considerably longer to build, like 80+ years? That is also mentioned at this link: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/pyram ... amids.html

Where did 22 years come from?

It has been a while since I saw the episode, so please forgive me if I mis-quoted or mis-understood.

Duende wrote: First off - Hearte, I for one am glad you are here. Constructive and critical criticism is necessary for growth and improvement. If we all sat around agreeing with each other, well, it'd be pretty boring and we wouldn't really GO anywhere intellectually. I am curious as to the origin of the quote you mentioned also. It'll be interesting to see how that all plays out.

My point precisely.

Blind acceptance of an individual's claims is not the way to go if one is actually interested in the subject. Ridiculous claims can be found all over the internet and in every fringe book ever published.

It is extremely important to know all the facts concerning an AA claim prior to evaluating the claim. Thast isd the only way to seperate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak 9and putting it politely!)Not that I know all of that, but I do (apparently) know a whole lot more about this than some of the people that post on this board.

I have nothing against Giorgio - he seems like a nice guy. But some of the things he says (by implication, primarily) on the show are simply unsupportable. Not that I blame him at all. I mean, he is trying to sell magazines. Everyone has to make a living.

Duende wrote:Second - are you Mohawk guy?

I don't know "Mohawk Guy." I do know (online) one guy in England who has (or had) a mohawk. He is the most knowledgeable person concerning Sumer I've ever met, online or otherwise. Are you telling me he's been posting here? If he has, I'm sure he's been banned by now. He's been banned from every forum he ever posted on, other than his own that is!

Duende wrote:Third, concerning errors in the show.

It was mentioned the pyramids were built in 22 years, and to do so, each block would have to be cut, transported, and placed in 9 seconds. But I was taught the pyramids took considerably longer to build, like 80+ years? That is also mentioned at this link: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/pyram ... amids.html

Where did 22 years come from?

It has been a while since I saw the episode, so please forgive me if I mis-quoted or mis-understood.

I know you didn't ask me this, but I linked to a PDF of a paper written by representatives of a large engineering firm in one of these threads (might have been this one.) They estimated only around 15 years for construction, using techniques known to have been utilized by pre-Bronze Age cultures.

Duende wrote:It was mentioned the pyramids were built in 22 years, and to do so, each block would have to be cut, transported, and placed in 9 seconds. But I was taught the pyramids took considerably longer to build, like 80+ years? That is also mentioned at this link: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/pyram ... amids.html

Where did 22 years come from?

It has been a while since I saw the episode, so please forgive me if I mis-quoted or mis-understood.

I think the 80-years from the National Geographic special was for all three pyramids (Khufu, Khafre, Menkaure), as they were built consecutively.

--

Not sure how the 22 year figure was calculated, but but here is an example I made, that sort of illustrates how a work-rate for moving and setting the blocks for the Great Pyramid allows it to be completed int 20 years:

Those are just raw numbers though. Let us say there are 6 months in a work year, which gives about 182 days. Of those days, let's say 48 days for weekends off, plus another 24 days for holidays, sick days, etc, that leaves about 110 days of work per year.

Then let us divide each one of those work days into two 5-hour shifts: 1100 hours of labor per year.

That means each hour 105 blks need to be placed. Say 105 crews for each shift (maybe ten guys per), that is 1050 guys per 5- hour shift or 2100 guys per day needed to move and place the blks.

So that means each crew would have about 5 hours a day to place one block. At this rate, it would take 20 years.

In sum, 20 years total, with 110 days of work each year, and each mover working 5-hour days with weekends and holidays off, and sick time -- figure just the movers alone, about 2100 guys (maybe 2200, then you can rotate crews and get even more time off).

This is just counting the movers only, and serves as an example of how the various work rates for a particular job might be calculated (in this case, only moving the blocks into position).